Threaded View

The questions, as a reviewer of the EPR, I'd have are what specifically did they do to "take care of a building," what type of equipment was there, and how did their actions postively impact their and their squadron's mission. Numbers alone are insufficient, you have to show impact. If you, as the supervisor, is writing that in an EPR then you're not doing your job nor are you helping your people.

I'm very familiar with the purpose. I just don't think it works.

I agree that everyone should start out with a "3" and it's up to the individual to upgrade or downgrade it. If you're going to give someone less than a "3" then you should have documentation readily available to support your evaluation.

Should also have to do the same if you're going to give above a 3. I've known people who write 4s and 5s because it's easier and requires less justification than a 3. Turn that around and the ratings would become more accurate, IMO.

Even a professional writer has a editor who reviews the book before it's published. In the AF, what we "publish" most often are EPRs and before they're "published" they need to be reviewed to ensure the product meets established standards. I've heard the arguments about the waste of time the review is but it's necessary because it affects the individual career. I wouldn't have want someone who's writing skills are on the 7-grade level to determine my promotion and/or possible assignments. The EPR should read like a literate, educated person wrote it.

You're joking, right? A literate, educated person doesn't use 8 abbreviations on one line of writing just to fit the space. There is nothing literate about an EPR. EPRs in the early 90s were far more literate and far more to the point. Unfortunately, the Air Force is more worried about format than substance.

All evaluations are subjective and part of the review process means different eyes see the EPR which, ideally, helps eliminates supervisor/endorser biases. Look at the EPR this way, it's a form of a resume that tells the reader what the person's responsibilities were, what they did, their achievements and their impact, and their potential for increased duties and responsibilities.

If the endorser doesn't trust the supervisor, the supervisor shouldn't be in that position. Be honest with yourself, it's easy as hell to tell those who are ready for increased duties and responsibilities without an EPR.